On gio, dic 02, 2010 at 11:27:52 +0100, Linus Lüssing wrote:
thanks for having joined the IRC channel, Hlabishi and Chris, that's
really speeding the discussions up a lot, I guess :). Just wanted
to throw in another idea open for discussions which is refering to
Hlabisihi's packet count weighting.
What do you guys think about pushing this concept even one step
further and removing the local packet count window? And instead
using a "smoother" exponential weighted average which got very
popular in TCP for it's RTT estimations:
RQ_new = f(newseqno, lastseqno, RQ_old, α)
= (1-α) * RQ_old + α * 1 / Δ(newseqno, lastseqno)
As in TCP, α is then the parameter for tweaking on how much
more priority a newer packet shall have and is chosen between 0
(conservative) and 1 (opportunistic).
What do you think?
IMHO this is not the best solution. Probably it could better than the
actual strategy, but, as TCP demonstrates, this is not a really nice way
of evaluating the RQ.
Imho, since we have more and more information than
TCP for evaluating the new RQ, we could try to make a better choice
considering "more values": instead of using only the deltaSEQ and the
oldRQ, we could try to apply a function that can weight also the previous
history of the link (of course with a limit).
newRQ = f(window, ...., window[N-1]) in which, each OGM (received or
not) can be weighted in a different way depending on its position.
I hope I've been clear.
furland is probably working on this aspect.
On Wed, Dec 01, 2010 at 01:30:18PM +0100, Marek Lindner wrote:
> On Wednesday 01 December 2010 10:46:10 hlabishi kobo wrote:
> > Thank you for considering this concept, i am working on the
> > implementation now. I would love to attend your IRC channel
> > discussions, just tell date and time.
> The IRC meetings are less formal. Just join us when you have the time. People
> hang out there all the time.
Ognuno di noi, da solo, non vale nulla
Ernesto "Che" Guevara